Author Topic: Kiera Knightly on Film Photographers vs Digital  (Read 5382 times)

gothamtomato

  • Self-Coat
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,144
Kiera Knightly on Film Photographers vs Digital
« on: November 10, 2014, 01:32:02 PM »
From Interview magazine:

“I’ve noticed that the people who started on film still have the ability to see the person in front of them. Whereas for a lot of photographers who have only ever worked in digital, the relationship between the photographer and the person who they’re taking a picture of sort of doesn’t exist anymore. They’re looking at a computer screen as opposed to the person.”
~Kiera Knightly

zapsnaps

  • Sheet Film
  • ****
  • Posts: 730
  • Get Zapped!
    • http://www.NowSeeThis.co.uk
Re: Kiera Knightly on Film Photographers vs Digital
« Reply #1 on: November 10, 2014, 02:30:24 PM »
I think that Kiera has a very good point - photographers who shoot tethered do spend the entire time looking at their wretched monitors. Even the ones whose work  I both admire & respect eg Rankin.
Nudes make the world go round
www.NowSeeThis.co.uk

Francois

  • Self-Coat
  • *****
  • Posts: 15,580
Re: Kiera Knightly on Film Photographers vs Digital
« Reply #2 on: November 10, 2014, 03:32:49 PM »
The camera already places a level of separation between the photographer and the subject. Adding lots of settings relating to histograms and white balance adds a second level of separation. Adding a tethered computer adds a third. It's pretty hard for the photographer to not pay attention to all those distractions.
Francois

Film is the vinyl record of photography.

Indofunk

  • Global Moderator
  • Self-Coat
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,570
    • photog & music
Re: Kiera Knightly on Film Photographers vs Digital
« Reply #3 on: November 10, 2014, 03:50:15 PM »
Francois nailed it.

limr

  • Self-Coat
  • *****
  • Posts: 991
    • A Modern Day Dinosaur
Re: Kiera Knightly on Film Photographers vs Digital
« Reply #4 on: November 10, 2014, 07:10:34 PM »
Leonore
http://moderndinosaur.wordpress.com

"Never stay up on the barren heights of cleverness, but come down into the green valleys of silliness." (Ludwig Wittgenstein)

timor

  • 120
  • **
  • Posts: 126
Re: Kiera Knightly on Film Photographers vs Digital
« Reply #5 on: November 10, 2014, 07:47:52 PM »
Francois nailed it.

Agreed.
Agreed.
Men could be smarter, than computers. Most however prefer to eat potato chips first.

Indofunk

  • Global Moderator
  • Self-Coat
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,570
    • photog & music
Re: Kiera Knightly on Film Photographers vs Digital
« Reply #6 on: November 10, 2014, 07:52:04 PM »
:D timor nailed it in a different way

limr

  • Self-Coat
  • *****
  • Posts: 991
    • A Modern Day Dinosaur
Re: Kiera Knightly on Film Photographers vs Digital
« Reply #7 on: November 10, 2014, 08:01:54 PM »
:D timor nailed it in a different way
Agreed again!  ;D
Leonore
http://moderndinosaur.wordpress.com

"Never stay up on the barren heights of cleverness, but come down into the green valleys of silliness." (Ludwig Wittgenstein)

Francois

  • Self-Coat
  • *****
  • Posts: 15,580
Re: Kiera Knightly on Film Photographers vs Digital
« Reply #8 on: November 10, 2014, 09:07:10 PM »
Come on guys!
You make me feel all brainy...
Francois

Film is the vinyl record of photography.

soeren

  • 120
  • **
  • Posts: 85
Re: Kiera Knightly on Film Photographers vs Digital
« Reply #9 on: November 11, 2014, 08:13:38 AM »
We need the bowdown emoticon here  ;D


« Last Edit: November 11, 2014, 08:16:32 AM by soeren »
Soeren
Naestved, Denmark

hookstrapped

  • Self-Coat
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,289
    • Peter Brian Schafer PHOTOGRAPHY
Re: Kiera Knightly on Film Photographers vs Digital
« Reply #10 on: November 11, 2014, 07:02:18 PM »
I agree with everything

Indofunk

  • Global Moderator
  • Self-Coat
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,570
    • photog & music
Re: Kiera Knightly on Film Photographers vs Digital
« Reply #11 on: November 11, 2014, 07:24:39 PM »
I just ate a bag of potato chips.

Francois

  • Self-Coat
  • *****
  • Posts: 15,580
Re: Kiera Knightly on Film Photographers vs Digital
« Reply #12 on: November 11, 2014, 10:01:40 PM »
I've just come to a strange conclusion:
-Potatoes turn green when exposed to light.
-this means potatoes are photo-sensitive.
-They were turned into chips at the factory.
-Indofunk just ate a whole bag.

this could only mean one thing: Indofunk now has light sensitive chips going through his body!  ;D ;D ;D ;D
Francois

Film is the vinyl record of photography.

Bryan

  • Self-Coat
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,235
    • Flickr
Re: Kiera Knightly on Film Photographers vs Digital
« Reply #13 on: November 11, 2014, 10:07:32 PM »
I've just come to a strange conclusion:
-Potatoes turn green when exposed to light.
-this means potatoes are photo-sensitive.
-They were turned into chips at the factory.
-Indofunk just ate a whole bag.

this could only mean one thing: Indofunk now has light sensitive chips going through his body!  ;D ;D ;D ;D

I just hope he doesn't share it with us after he develops it.

Indofunk

  • Global Moderator
  • Self-Coat
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,570
    • photog & music
Re: Kiera Knightly on Film Photographers vs Digital
« Reply #14 on: November 11, 2014, 10:11:26 PM »
I've just come to a strange conclusion:
-Potatoes turn green when exposed to light.
-this means potatoes are photo-sensitive.
-They were turned into chips at the factory.
-Indofunk just ate a whole bag.

this could only mean one thing: Indofunk now has light sensitive chips going through his body!  ;D ;D ;D ;D

I just hope he doesn't share it with us after he develops it.

 ;D ;D ;D :o

timor

  • 120
  • **
  • Posts: 126
Re: Kiera Knightly on Film Photographers vs Digital
« Reply #15 on: November 12, 2014, 12:36:08 AM »
Yeh, but indofunk ate the chips after. And doesn't matter if he ate it or not, I think he is light sensitive anyway.  ;D

Indofunk

  • Global Moderator
  • Self-Coat
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,570
    • photog & music
Re: Kiera Knightly on Film Photographers vs Digital
« Reply #16 on: November 12, 2014, 12:41:55 AM »
That's why I have to be very careful never to spill Rodinal on myself!  :o

ColRay

  • 35mm
  • *
  • Posts: 15
Re: Kiera Knightly on Film Photographers vs Digital
« Reply #17 on: November 12, 2014, 12:48:38 AM »
I've just come to a strange conclusion:
-Potatoes turn green when exposed to light.
-this means potatoes are photo-sensitive.
-They were turned into chips at the factory.
-Indofunk just ate a whole bag.

this could only mean one thing: Indofunk now has light sensitive chips going through his body!  ;D ;D ;D ;D

The chlorophyll  in plants can be used for making alternative process prints. I will post a couple I have made using the process

ColRay

  • 35mm
  • *
  • Posts: 15
Re: Kiera Knightly on Film Photographers vs Digital
« Reply #18 on: November 12, 2014, 01:00:23 AM »
 Chlorophyll  prints this method is a bleach out process, once the paper has been coated and exposed with UV light dark parts of the image are hardened and the lighter parts bleach out.
« Last Edit: November 12, 2014, 04:59:38 AM by ColRay »

timor

  • 120
  • **
  • Posts: 126
Re: Kiera Knightly on Film Photographers vs Digital
« Reply #19 on: November 12, 2014, 02:29:24 AM »
How do you do that ?

soeren

  • 120
  • **
  • Posts: 85
Re: Kiera Knightly on Film Photographers vs Digital
« Reply #20 on: November 12, 2014, 09:46:15 AM »
I've just come to a strange conclusion:
-Potatoes turn green when exposed to light.
-this means potatoes are photo-sensitive.
-They were turned into chips at the factory.
-Indofunk just ate a whole bag.

this could only mean one thing: Indofunk now has light sensitive chips going through his body!  ;D ;D ;D ;D


I just hope he doesn't share it with us after he develops it.
It's a printing out process like POP ;D
« Last Edit: November 12, 2014, 09:48:18 AM by soeren »
Soeren
Naestved, Denmark

limr

  • Self-Coat
  • *****
  • Posts: 991
    • A Modern Day Dinosaur
Re: Kiera Knightly on Film Photographers vs Digital
« Reply #21 on: November 12, 2014, 07:45:30 PM »
Well, this thread has has some interesting twists and turns ;)
Leonore
http://moderndinosaur.wordpress.com

"Never stay up on the barren heights of cleverness, but come down into the green valleys of silliness." (Ludwig Wittgenstein)


mcduff

  • Self-Coat
  • *****
  • Posts: 867
  • Loving the 645...
    • ...on Flickr...
Re: Kiera Knightly on Film Photographers vs Digital
« Reply #23 on: November 12, 2014, 08:40:19 PM »
Yes it has been an interesting thread.

I was kind of impressed that someone relatively young like her (I think she is still late 20's) would articulate this difference. I know she may be older than some of our amazing crew, but my comment still stands.

And that chlorophyll stuff is amazing. I am so down for that!
---------------
check out Don's stuff at http://www.flickr.com/photos/mcduffco/

Francois

  • Self-Coat
  • *****
  • Posts: 15,580
Re: Kiera Knightly on Film Photographers vs Digital
« Reply #24 on: November 12, 2014, 09:36:40 PM »
I tried anthotypes a few years ago. But I discovered that not all plants react the same way to light and that 35mm is way too small for the process.
Francois

Film is the vinyl record of photography.

mcduff

  • Self-Coat
  • *****
  • Posts: 867
  • Loving the 645...
    • ...on Flickr...
Re: Kiera Knightly on Film Photographers vs Digital
« Reply #25 on: November 12, 2014, 10:31:22 PM »
If I did It I was probably gonna cheat - like I did for cyanotypes - and make an Interneg from a laser printer with overhead transparency acetates.
---------------
check out Don's stuff at http://www.flickr.com/photos/mcduffco/

ColRay

  • 35mm
  • *
  • Posts: 15
Re: Kiera Knightly on Film Photographers vs Digital
« Reply #26 on: November 12, 2014, 10:34:49 PM »
I tried anthotypes a few years ago. But I discovered that not all plants react the same way to light and that 35mm is way too small for the process.

 From 35mm it isn't a problem .. just make larger digital  negatives

Francois

  • Self-Coat
  • *****
  • Posts: 15,580
Re: Kiera Knightly on Film Photographers vs Digital
« Reply #27 on: November 12, 2014, 10:48:56 PM »
At the time I didn't...
Also, it takes a lot of blue irises' petals to make enough emulsion for it to work!
Francois

Film is the vinyl record of photography.

imagesfrugales

  • Sheet Film
  • ****
  • Posts: 777
  • coffeewaster
    • The Caffenol Blog
Re: Kiera Knightly on Film Photographers vs Digital
« Reply #28 on: November 12, 2014, 10:57:00 PM »
Everyone nailed everything here. Am I the only one who wants to nail Keira?

(duck and cover)

johnha

  • 120
  • **
  • Posts: 136
Re: Kiera Knightly on Film Photographers vs Digital
« Reply #29 on: November 13, 2014, 01:44:36 AM »
I remember reading an interview with one of the big name portrait photographers years ago in the pre-d*****l days (possibly Bailey). He said he never used Polaroids apart from right at the end of the shoot to check the camera & lens were working properly. Using them during the shoot caused aggro with the sitters, their entourages and hangers on all wanting to check every detail of every shot.

Jack Johnson

  • Sheet Film
  • ****
  • Posts: 667
    • Me on Flickr
Re: Kiera Knightly on Film Photographers vs Digital
« Reply #30 on: November 16, 2014, 05:37:53 PM »
Yeh, but indofunk ate the chips after. And doesn't matter if he ate it or not, I think he is light sensitive anyway.  ;D

And here I've been toiling away on my banana emulsion, when I could have been doing contact prints with indofunk.  ;)

I think if you have a big enough warehouse, you could also enlarge an image from the ceiling onto the floor, and cockroaches would congregate based on the intensity of the light. Hmmm.

Please don't tell Keira that I segued from her to bananas to sunburns to cockroaches. I was low enough on the list already.